Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 28769
U.S.C. 532. For purposes of 47 U.S.C. 532(b)(1)(A) and (B), only those channels that must be carried pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 534 and 535 qualify as channels that are required for use by Federal law or regulation. For cable systems with 100 or fewer channels, channels that cannot be used due to technical and safety regulations of the Federal Government (e.g., aeronautical channels) shall be excluded when calculating the set-aside requirement.
(h)(1) Cable system operators shall provide prospective leased access programmers with the following information within 30 calendar days of the date on which a bona fide request for leased access information is made, provided that the programmer has remitted any application fee that the cable system operator requires up to a maximum of $100 per system-specific bona fide request:
(i) How much of the operator’s leased access set-aside capacity is available;
(ii) A complete schedule of the operator’s full-time leased access rates;
(iii) Rates associated with technical and studio costs; and
(iv) If specifically requested, a sample leased access contract.
(2) Operators of systems subject to small system relief shall provide the information required in paragraph (h)(1) of this section within 45 calendar days of a bona fide request from a prospective leased access programmer. For these purposes, systems subject to small system relief are systems that either:
(i) Qualify as small systems under § 76.901(c) and are owned by a small cable company as defined under § 76.901(e); or
(ii) Have been granted special relief.
(3) Bona fide requests, as used in this section, are defined as requests from potential leased access programmers that have provided the following information:
(i) The desired length of a contract term;
(ii) The anticipated commencement date for carriage; and
(iii) The nature of the programming.
(4) All requests for leased access must be made in writing and must specify the date on which the request was sent to the operator.
(5) Operators shall maintain, for Commission inspection, sufficient supporting documentation to justify the scheduled rates, including supporting contracts, calculations of the implicit fees, and justifications for all adjustments.
(6) Cable system operators shall disclose on their own websites, or through alternate means if they do not have their own websites, a contact name or title, telephone number, and email address for the person responsible for responding to requests for information about leased access channels.
(i) Cable operators are permitted to negotiate rates below the maximum rates permitted in paragraphs (c) through (g) of this section.
§ 76.971 [Amended]
■ 3. Amend § 76.971, by removing paragraph (a)(4).
■ 4. Amend § 76.975 by revising paragraph (e) and adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:
§ 76.975 Commercial leased access dispute resolution.
(e) The cable operator or other respondent will have 30 days from service of the petition to file an answer. If a leased access rate is disputed, the answer must show that the rate charged is not higher than the maximum permitted rate for such leased access and must be supported by the affidavit of a responsible company official. If, after an answer is submitted, the staff finds a prima facie violation of our rules, the staff may require a respondent to produce additional information or specify other procedures necessary for resolution of the proceeding. Replies to answers must be filed within fifteen (15) days after submission of the answer.
(i) Section 76.7 applies to petitions for relief filed under this section, except as otherwise provided in this section.
[FR Doc. 2019–13134 Filed 6–19–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Parts 20 and 21
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0012; FF09M21200–178–FXMB1232099BPP0L2]
RIN 1018–BC72
Migratory Bird Permits; Regulations for Managing Resident Canada Goose Populations
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY:
In 2005, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or “we”) published a final environmental impact statement on management of resident Canada geese (Branta canadensis) that documented resident Canada goose population levels “that are increasingly coming into conflict with people and causing personal and public property damage.”
Subsequently, the Service implemented several actions intended to reduce, manage, and control resident Canada goose populations in the continental United States and to reduce related damages. Those actions included depredation and control orders that allow destruction of Canada goose nests and eggs by authorized personnel between March 1 and June 30. However, some resident Canada geese currently initiate nests in February, particularly in the southern United States, and it seems likely that in the future nest initiation dates will begin earlier and hatching of eggs will perhaps end later than dates currently experienced.
This final rule amends the depredation and control orders to allow destruction of resident Canada goose nests and eggs at any time of year.
DATES:
This rule is effective July 22, 2019.
ADDRESSES:
Comments we received on the proposed rule, as well as the proposed rule itself, the related environmental assessment, and this final rule, are available at http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Paul I. Padding, Atlantic Flyway Representative, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 11510 American Holly Drive, Laurel, MD 20708; (301) 497–5851; paul_padding@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority and Responsibility
Migratory birds are protected under four bilateral migratory bird treaties the United States entered into with:
- Great Britain (for Canada in 1916, as amended in 1999),
- The United Mexican States (1936, as amended in 1972 and 1999),
- Japan (1972, as amended in 1974), and
- The Soviet Union (1978).
Regulations allowing the take of migratory birds are authorized by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Act; 16 U.S.C. 703–712), which implements the above-mentioned treaties. The Act provides that, subject to and to carry out the purposes of the treaties, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed to determine when, to what extent, and by what means allowing hunting, killing, and other forms of taking of migratory birds, their nests, and eggs is compatible with the conventions. The Act requires the Secretary to implement a determination by adopting regulations permitting and governing those activities.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Jun 19, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM 20JNR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Canada geese are federally protected by the Act because they are listed as migratory birds in all four treaties. Because Canada geese are covered by all four treaties, regulations must meet the requirements of the most restrictive of the four. For Canada geese, this is the treaty with Canada. All regulations concerning resident Canada geese are compatible with its terms, with particular reference to Articles II, V, and VII.
Each treaty not only permits sport hunting but also permits the take of migratory birds for other reasons, including scientific, educational, propagative, or other specific purposes consistent with the conservation principles of the various Conventions.
More specifically:
- Article VII, Article II (paragraph 3), and Article V of The Protocol Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Canada Amending the 1916 Convention between the United Kingdom and the United States of America for the Protection of Migratory Birds in Canada and the United States provides specific limitations on allowing the take of migratory birds for reasons other than sport hunting.
- Article VII authorizes permitting the take, kill, etc., of migratory birds that, under extraordinary conditions, become seriously injurious to agricultural or other interests.
- Article V relates to the taking of nests and eggs.
- Article II, paragraph 3, states that, in order to ensure the long-term conservation of migratory birds, migratory bird populations shall be managed in accord with listed conservation principles.
The other treaties are less restrictive:
- The treaties with both Japan (Article III, paragraph 1, subparagraph (b)) and the Soviet Union (Article II, paragraph 1, subparagraph (d)) provide specific exceptions to migratory bird take prohibitions for the purpose of protecting persons and property.
- The treaty with Mexico requires, with regard to migratory game birds, only that there be a “closed season” on hunting and that hunting be limited to four months in each year.
Regulations governing the issuance of permits to take, capture, kill, possess, and transport migratory birds are promulgated at 50 CFR Parts 13, 21, and 22, and are issued by the Service.
The Service annually promulgates regulations governing the take, possession, and transportation of migratory game birds under sport hunting seasons at 50 CFR Part 20.
Regulations regarding all other take of migratory birds (except for eagles) are published at 50 CFR Part 21 and typically are not changed annually.
Background
In November 2005, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) published a final environmental impact statement (FEIS) on managing resident Canada geese, documenting increasing conflicts with people and property damage (see 70 FR 69985, November 18, 2005). On August 10, 2006, the Service published a final rule (71 FR 45964) establishing regulations at 50 CFR parts 20 and 21 to allow state wildlife agencies, private landowners, and airports to conduct population control activities. These included depredation and control orders permitting authorized personnel to destroy Canada goose nests and eggs between March 1 and June 30, the typical nesting period. However, in recent years, some resident Canada geese have begun nesting as early as February, particularly in the southern U.S. Given this trend, the Service proposed a rule (83 FR 17987, April 25, 2018) to allow nest and egg destruction at any time of year. This final rule adopts those changes.
Definition of Resident Canada Geese
The current definition of resident Canada geese in 50 CFR 20.11 and 21.3 states: "Canada geese that nest within the lower 48 States and the District of Columbia in the months of March, April, May, or June, or reside within the lower 48 States and the District of Columbia in the months of April, May, June, July, or August." This rule amends the definition by removing "in the months of March, April, May, or June" after "Columbia" to clarify that any Canada geese nesting within these areas are considered resident Canada geese.
Removal of Date Restrictions on Nest and Egg Destruction
Currently, destruction of resident Canada goose nests and eggs is authorized under several regulations, each specifying date restrictions. This rule removes those restrictions, allowing destruction at any time of year under 50 CFR 21.26, 21.49, 21.50, 21.51, and 21.52. This change is based on three factors:
- Nest and egg destruction has been effective in reducing local conflicts and damages caused by resident Canada geese.
- Resident Canada geese are identified by location, not nesting period.
- Some Canada geese already nest in February in southern states, and earlier nesting is expected in mid-latitude and northern states in the future.
Eliminating Date Restrictions for Lethal Control in California, Oregon, and Washington
A 1999 rule (64 FR 32766) established special Canada goose permits, allowing state agencies to conduct management activities between March 11 and August 31 while minimizing adult bird take before June. A date restriction of May 1 through August 31 was imposed in California, Oregon, and Washington to protect the Aleutian Canada goose (Branta canadensis leucopareia), which was listed as endangered in 1967 and reclassified as threatened in 1990 (55 FR 51106, December 12, 1990). Following its removal from the endangered list in 2001 (66 FR 15643, March 20, 2001), its population has grown significantly. Given this, the May 1 restriction is removed, aligning management activities across all states from March 11 through August 31.
Environmental Assessment
An environmental assessment (EA) analyzed two alternatives:
- Maintain current date restrictions in 50 CFR 21.26, 21.49, 21.50, 21.51, and 21.52 and retain the existing definition of resident Canada geese (No Action).
- Revise the definition of resident Canada geese and allow nest and egg destruction at any time of year under the same regulations (Proposed Action).
The full EA is available at http://www.fws.gov/birds or http://www.regulations.gov (Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0012). The amendment regarding Aleutian Canada geese is a categorically excluded action under 43 CFR 46.210, addressed in an environmental action statement (EAS), available at the same links.
Review of Public Comments
The Service accepted comments on the proposed rule from April 25 to May 25, 2018 (83 FR 17987). Seven private individuals and one organization submitted comments. The National Wildlife Control Operators Association supported the proposed changes, while private individuals opposed aspects of the rule. Concerns included:
- A preference for increased hunting opportunities over control measures.
- Opposition to capturing and euthanizing geese on National Wildlife Refuges, reducing hunting opportunities.
- Opposition to lethal control of a native species, urging the Service to focus on invasive and endangered species.
- General opposition to killing any animals.
Service Response to Relevant Comments
Hunting alone has not sufficiently reduced resident Canada goose numbers to alleviate conflicts, despite long hunting seasons and large bag limits. Conflicts often occur outside the hunting season or in areas where hunting is restricted (e.g., urban areas, airports). Direct control methods such as nest and egg destruction and lethal removal address local conflicts and are decided at the local level. The Service prioritizes nonlethal control but allows lethal methods when necessary. No changes were made to the proposed actions in response to these comments.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 states that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviews all significant rules. OIRA determined that this rule is not significant.
Executive Order 13563
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation’s regulatory system to promote predictability, reduce uncertainty, and use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives.
E.O. 13563 further emphasizes that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. This rule has been developed in a manner consistent with these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis describing the effects of the rule on small businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions.
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. For a regulatory flexibility analysis to be required, impacts must exceed thresholds for both "significant impact" and "substantial number of small entities" (5 U.S.C. 605(b)).
The economic impacts of this rule will primarily affect State and local governments and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services due to the structure of wildlife damage management. While data is not available to estimate the exact number of local governments affected, it is unlikely to be a substantial number nationally. Therefore, we certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). It will not:
- Have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
- Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.
- Cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions.
- Have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Executive Order 13771—Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
This final rule is an Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) deregulatory action because it relieves a restriction in 50 CFR parts 20 and 21.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.), we have determined the following:
a. This rule will not "significantly or uniquely" affect small government activities. A small government agency plan is not required.
b. This rule will not produce a Federal mandate on local or State government or private entities. Therefore, this action is not a "significant regulatory action" under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Takings
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this rule does not contain a provision for taking private property and will not have significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is not required.
Federalism
This rule does not interfere with the States’ abilities to manage themselves or their funds. We do not expect any economic impacts to result from this regulation change. This rule will not have sufficient Federalism effects to warrant preparation of a federalism summary impact statement under E.O. 13132.
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has determined that this rule will not unduly burden the judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain new collections of information that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
OMB has already approved the information collection requirements associated with the control and management of resident Canada geese under 50 CFR part 20 and 50 CFR part 21, assigning OMB Control Number 1018-0133 (expires May 31, 2019).
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act
We have analyzed this rule in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and U.S. Department of the Interior regulations at 43 CFR part 46.
We have completed an environmental assessment of the amendment regarding the depredation and control orders allowing destruction of resident Canada goose nests and eggs at any time of year. This assessment is included in the docket for this rule and is available at:
- http://www.regulations.gov (Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0012).
The amendment to § 21.26 regarding the current status of the Aleutian Canada goose was not addressed in the EA but is a NEPA categorically excluded action (43 CFR 46.210). This action is documented in an environmental action statement (EAS), also available in the docket for this rule.
Environmental Consequences of the Action
- Migratory Canada geese do not nest in the lower 48 States or the District of Columbia; thus, this rule is not expected to have significant impacts on migratory Canada geese.
- Resident Canada goose populations are well above population objectives.
- The action is expected to result in the destruction of a maximum of 2,749 additional nests in January and February.
- This action is likely to shift some existing nest and egg destruction activities from March to earlier months.
- Socioeconomic impact: Expected positive effects in urban and suburban areas due to reduced goose conflicts and less crop depredation in agricultural sites.
- Endangered species impact: This rule will not affect endangered or threatened species or critical habitats.
Compliance With Endangered Species Act Requirements
In accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), this rule will not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction of critical habitats.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
This rule has been evaluated in accordance with:
- Presidential Memorandum of April 29, 1994 ("Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments," 59 FR 22951).
- E.O. 13175 and 512 DM 2.
We have determined that there are no potential effects on federally recognized Indian tribes. This rule will not interfere with tribes’ abilities to manage themselves or their funds.
(n) Resident Canada geese means Canada geese that nest within the lower 48 States and the District of Columbia or that reside within the lower 48 States and the District of Columbia in the months of April, May, June, July, or August.
PART 21—MIGRATORY BIRD PERMITS
■ 3. The authority citation for part 21 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703–712.
■ 4. Amend § 21.3 by revising the definition for “Resident Canada geese” to read as follows:
§ 21.3 Definitions.
Resident Canada geese means Canada geese that nest within the lower 48 States and the District of Columbia or that reside within the lower 48 States and the District of Columbia in the months of April, May, June, July, or August.
■ 5. Amend § 21.26 by revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as follows:
§ 21.26 Special Canada goose permit.
(d)(2) When may a State conduct management and control activities?
States and their employees and agents may conduct egg and nest manipulation activities at any time of year. Other management and control activities, including the take of resident Canada geese, under this section may only be conducted between March 11 and August 31.
■ 6. Amend § 21.49 by revising paragraph (d)(3) to read as follows:
§ 21.49 Control order for resident Canada geese at airports and military airfields.
(d)(3) Airports and military airfields may conduct management and control activities, involving the take of resident Canada geese, under this section between April 1 and September 15. The destruction of resident Canada goose nests and eggs may take place at any time of year.
■ 7. Amend § 21.50 by revising paragraph (d)(4) to read as follows:
§ 21.50 Depredation order for resident Canada geese nests and eggs.
(d)(4) Registrants may conduct resident Canada goose nest and egg destruction activities at any time of year. Homeowners’ associations and local governments or their agents must obtain landowner consent prior to destroying nests and eggs on private property within the homeowners’ association or local government’s jurisdiction and be in compliance with all State and local laws and regulations.
■ 8. Amend § 21.51 by revising paragraph (d)(4) to read as follows:
§ 21.51 Depredation order for resident Canada geese at agricultural facilities.
(d)(4) Authorized agricultural producers and their employees and agents may conduct management and control activities, involving the take of resident Canada geese, under this section between May 1 and August 31. The destruction of resident Canada goose nests and eggs may take place at any time of year.
■ 9. Amend § 21.52 by revising paragraph (e)(3) to read as follows:
§ 21.52 Public health control order for resident Canada geese.
(e)(3) Authorized State and Tribal wildlife agencies and their employees and agents may conduct management and control activities, involving the take of resident Canada geese, under this section between April 1 and August 31. The destruction of resident Canada goose nests and eggs may take place at any time of year.
Dated: June 13, 2019
Karen Budd-Falen, Deputy Solicitor for Parks and Wildlife, Exercising the Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2019–13097 Filed 6–19–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P